InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 14
Posts 828
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/08/2012

Re: upontheroof89 post# 62079

Monday, 01/29/2018 8:30:58 AM

Monday, January 29, 2018 8:30:58 AM

Post# of 63558
Thanks for the great articles - both are very interesting in their own way - but the one about the Tariff decision was particularly enlightening. It made a great point about how the decision also affects U.S.-based manufacturing of components related to solar installations that are not necessarily related directly to the production of solar panels themselves (e.g., racking solutions, inverters, etc.)

As for the 3D solar cell patent status - the last I checked the company had been granted a patent in China and Singapore but denied in the U.S. The patent in India still is pending review (and is associated with "Solar 3D Inc." or similar).

From the March 29, 2017 filing:

Generally, the solar installation business is not dependent on intellectual property. Research and development costs for the development of the 3D cell ended in 2016.

In 2015, we spent $53,000 for research and patent work for a 3-dimensional solar cell. As the price of existing solar modules has dropped, the risk and projected cost to further develop, test and manufacture the 3-dimensional cell is not justifiable. The Company received a patent for the 3-dimensional solar cell for China during 2016.



EDIT: Since the U.S. patent was denied but the China patent was granted - it doesn't really help at all with respect to trying to increase the manufacturing of solar panels in the U.S. I always liked that company was planning to license the technology to other manufactures as opposed to producing panels directly. Perhaps that could spur Chinese manufactures to produce a higher-efficiency panel which would help to make it more competitive and offset the higher tariffs but it is unlikely that it could be done in the applicable time-frame.

Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain